Talk:Istrian exodus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Extreme POV
PIO, stop adding the same information you have been trying to add to the Tito page. What you are stating is hardly NPOV, not to mention unfactual. I have yet to see any proof of what you have added, and will revert it until you get a valid source for the information.
[edit] Edit war?
We need to figure out some way of solving the edit war that is currently going on here. Apparently, one side is consistently trying to impose an Italian POV over a clear Yugoslav POV that had previously taken over. I appeal to both for joint cooperation so that we don't waste time on useless and endless reverts.E.Cogoy 05:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see how it was a clear Yugoslav POV, as the person who created the initial article was Italian himself. This was followed by PIO's heavily pro-Italian POV changes which I tried to change to NPOV. Then there was another Italian edit that was very close to NPOV, but lacked proper citations for actions like "political cleansing" taking place, etc.--Zivan56 20:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Major editing
I apologize as I did a major editing, trying to write a few NPOV paragraphs, and forgot to log in. There is still a Reference section that should be added. FrancescoMazzucotelli 19:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] history
I consider simple history!--PIO 17:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well, where to start with all your edits. First of all, its "Yugoslav" people, not "jugoslav" as you put it. These changes are considered racist, and perhaps even defamitory if they have any meaning in Italian. Furthemore, all identifiable ethnic groups are treated as proper names, and as such should be capitalised.
- Second of all, Dalmatia was not an Italian province; check the article you linked to before making changes. Tito was not the leader of Yugoslavia during this time, Ivan Ribar was until 1953 the leader of the communist part of Yugoslavia.
- I suggest you stop editing these pages, as you are clearly the one who is not familiar with them. If you have something to contribute that you know is true, I have no problems with it; but this is just "vandalism" as you call it. --Zivan56 02:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- The exodus is also dalmatian because Zadar was an italian town with a high percentage of Italians (about 83%) actually there are not italian people here, we could suppose that 20.000 Italian were forced to exodus. --Ilario 09:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- The capitalization could be an error. If you think that is a "racism", your opinion could be also racist. --Ilario 09:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- The integrations of other contibutors are not "vandalism". I'm verifying them with integration and references. --Ilario 09:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- I think you are confused as to who the comment was directed at. This is to PIO (aka Jxy) and not your edits. If you have proof, that is in English, feel free to post the info here. It is not an error, he does it all the time and its not proper english. He has been vandalising pages before and he is very close to being banned for that. --Zivan56 23:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- The integrations of other contibutors are not "vandalism". I'm verifying them with integration and references. --Ilario 09:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tito
I've verified. The persecutions among Istrians with Italian ethnicity was caused suddenly the Armistice (1943-1945) by local populations following revenge's desire caused by Fascism and its nationalist politic. A second phase (started in the 1945) was caused by Tito and Yugoslav Army who had the aim to acquire Trieste before other Allied Forces. In this last situation the aim was not an revenge, but a political aim. If Allied Forces had been persuaded that the Slav ethnic presence was a majority (or the entirety) in comparison with Italian presence, the Istria and Trieste would been assigned easily to Yugoslavia. The aim of Tito was political, but it was present. In fact in the following years Tito became aware that in some parts of Istria these aims were destroying the economic structure because a lot of Italians were traders or artisans, and he changed his politic. --Ilario 10:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Now i add in article some identical informations of foibe massacres: in fact is the same historic context!--PIO 11:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ethnic Cleansing
It surprises me that some people have not even read this article fully before making changes to it ad-hoc. The London Memorandum of 1954 gave to the ethnic Italians either the choice of opting to leave (the so-called optants) or staying. These exiles were to be given compensation for their loss of property and other indemnity by the Italian state under the terms of the peace treaties. Get it now? Now, read the definition of Ethnic cleansing and tell me if it matches up. Nobody was forced to leave, and they were given compensation if they did leave. Also, with regards to the Tito, he was not the leader until 1954 (see List_of_leaders_of_communist_Yugoslavia). You, PIO/Jxy, see bent on accusing anything you can think of that is negative. --Zivan56 20:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
About command of Broz and ethnic cleansing you must apprehending above statements of Ilario and mine: Tito's command expression is in foibe massacres too and ethnic cleansing is in see also section of foibe too! Your interpretation about optants is wrong because you ignore Prominent Italian historians like..... This article is simple an other part of same historic event of foibe: both were ethnic cleansing for prominent Italian historians! Your changes are POV very much because you are an admirer of dictator Broz and you are negative obstructionist. Moreover in my next change i approve your some words added in article to verify your real intention of neutral collaboration! In Slovenia you can find this book: Tudi mi smo umrli za domovino.--PIO 16:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Prominent Italian historians - need I say more? Either way, it is very clear you have an inherent bias against Tito, no matter what "sources" you provide. Anybody can find any source with any POV easily, but finding more than a few is what will allow you to prove your argument (especially with non-peer reviewed sources) --Zivan56 19:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
You don't know history! You are alone troublesome admirer of dictator Broz in this discussion: an administrator needs block you! Moreover in my next change i use different words.--PIO 16:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
So, despite the fact that 5 people so far have reverted some of your edits, you still think you are right? Two of them were Italian, so you can't say they were "admirers." You are the one that clearly needs to be blocked, its just wikipedia bureaucracy that keeps them from doing it. Furthemore, I don't even want to start with your violations of the English language; I suggest taking an in depth course instead of doing ad-hoc translation from Italian. --Zivan56 06:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)